Framed by opportunity and gender theories, this study examines whether men and women who occupy similar organisational positions differ in the types of fraud committed and their rationalisations. Based on 261 published legal cases of convicted fraudsters in New Zealand, our results show that fraudster's position and rationalisation are important fraud predictors. Our multinomial regression results show that there is a significant difference in the fraud committed in a similar position. There is a relationship between female gambling and embezzlement fraud. A large percentage of fraudsters of both genders offered no rationalisation; those who did, claimed they were victims of circumstances (denial of responsibility) and morally justified their offending. The morally justified rationalisation was associated with lifestyles and pleasing others. Moreover, two rationalisation categories—appeal to higher loyalties and condemning the condemners—are significant in predicting the likelihood of obtaining by deception and embezzlement fraud in the New Zealand context. We also identify two distinct patterns of fraud offending: instrumental-opportunist and pathological-opportunist.

本研究以机会和性别理论为框架，检验了担任相似组织职位的男性和女性在所犯的欺诈类型及其合理化方面是否存在差异。基于新西兰已公布的 261 起已定罪欺诈者的法律案件，我们的结果表明，欺诈者的立场和合理化是重要的欺诈预测因素。我们的多项回归结果表明，类似职位的欺诈行为存在显着差异。女性赌博与挪用公款欺诈之间存在关系。大部分男女欺诈者都没有提供任何理由；那些这样做的人声称他们是环境的受害者（否认责任），并在道德上为他们的罪行辩护。道德上合理的合理化与生活方式和取悦他人有关。- 呼吁更高的忠诚度和谴责谴责者 - 在预测新西兰背景下通过欺骗和贪污欺诈获得的可能性方面具有重要意义。我们还确定了两种不同的欺诈犯罪模式：工具性机会主义者和病态机会主义者。